Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 58
  1. #1


    Member Since
    Aug 14, 2007
    Posts
    63
    Mountain Lion is the last straw.
    Hi all. I'm just posting to vent my frustration at Apple and the "requirements" for Mountain Lion.

    I've got 4 macs in the house at the moment. I'm writing this on a Macbook Air and I use a 2008 Core2Dup Mac Mini. Also have 2 ageing G4's. I'm sure there are a lot of people that felt the rub of G4's been outdated. A lot of people accepted this as the move from PPC to Intel was indeed a fair leap.

    Now however their saying that a 2Ghz Core2Duo will not run the next OS? Thats barely a 5 year cycle!!!

    Every other OS on the market has much more modest requirements and this move is clearly about money and not any major technical innovation. The Mac I'm writing this on will surely be my last and I'm going to move towards the Linux flavour to keep my machines alive and to invest in the future.

    Does anyone else on here feel the same way?

  2. #2

    Dysfunction's Avatar
    Member Since
    Mar 17, 2008
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    6,881
    Specs:
    Way... way too many specs to list.
    Meh. Not really. There's really no reason to upgrade in general. To be honest, my 08 still has snow leopard on it and will never get lion. Since, the new feature sets been a bit on the light side from my view point.
    mike
    This machine kills fascists
    Got # ? phear the command line!

  3. #3

    chscag's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 23, 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    49,078
    Specs:
    Late 2013 27" iMac, iPad 3, iPhone 6s+, iPhone 6+, 3 iPods, El Capitan
    The reason your machine will not run Mountain Lion is because of its integrated graphics chipset. I know that doesn't help, but just though I'd put that out there. I recently sold my early 2008 2.4 GHZ MacBook because it too can not be upgraded to ML.

  4. #4


    Member Since
    Aug 14, 2007
    Posts
    63
    Yeah, agree that there isn't always a reason to upgrade, but sometimes there is. I just find that with the amount of money Apple are worth they could afford to support technology that it created a little longer.

    Premium products in general will/should last longer than cheaper alternatives. The issue is not because it's got an integrated graphics card. Its because Apple won't integrate support for this graphics card.

    Linux and Windows manage to support a vast array of hardware . The minimum spec for Windows 7 is this:
    "1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor

    1 gigabyte (GB) RAM (32-bit) or 2 GB RAM (64-bit)

    16 GB available hard disk space (32-bit) or 20 GB (64-bit)

    DirectX 9 graphics device with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver"



    With that in mind any computer brought in the last 10 years will run Windows 7 (perhaps with a RAM upgrade). I don't like windows so much, but Apple really seem to be taking the p***. Come on Apple! Whats with you? Can't even load tunes onto an iPod with 10.4 Tiger any anymore!

  5. #5

    pigoo3's Avatar
    Member Since
    May 20, 2008
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    35,352
    Specs:
    2011 13" MBP 2.3ghz, 8gig ram, OS 10.8.5
    Quote Originally Posted by Hutchism View Post
    Every other OS on the market has much more modest requirements and this move is clearly about money and not any major technical innovation.
    Thinking positively...maybe OS 10.8 Mountain Lion will be a some sort of big leap forward considering the video hardware requirements.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hutchism View Post
    The Mac I'm writing this on will surely be my last and I'm going to move towards the Linux flavour to keep my machines alive and to invest in the future.
    Good luck with that! I don't think Linux is going to overtake Windows or the Mac OS anytime soon.

    Also realize that there's absolutely no need to immediately jump on the OS 10.8 bandwagon. Plenty of folks (who can & cannot upgrade to 10.8) will continue to use OS 10.7 for years & years.

    For example...you could easily keep using your MacBook until 2015 running Lion (10.7)...and at that point probably need a newer computer anyway (which will run 10.8).

    - Nick
    - Too many "beachballs", read this: Beachballs
    - Computer seems slower than it used to? Read this for some slow computer tips: Speedup
    - Almost full hard drive? Some solutions. Out of Space
    - Apple Battery Info. Battery

  6. #6

    pigoo3's Avatar
    Member Since
    May 20, 2008
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    35,352
    Specs:
    2011 13" MBP 2.3ghz, 8gig ram, OS 10.8.5
    Quote Originally Posted by Hutchism View Post
    With that in mind any computer brought in the last 10 years will run Windows 7 (perhaps with a RAM upgrade).
    Microsoft does what they do...and Apple does what Apple does.

    Before you go "cherry-picking" the positives regarding Windows (any computer brought in the last 10 years will run Windows 7)...also keep in mind the negatives/headaches that also come with running Windows:

    - viruses & malware issues
    - unbelievably long long OS installs & updates
    - lack of innovation (copy cats of the Mac OS in many ways)
    - ohh...do I need to mention Windows Vista!
    - do we really still need a VGA port on Windows computers??

    Windows has it's positives...but Windows has it's negatives as well. So when making comparisons to the Mac OS...keep both the positives & negatives in mind before making a final evaluation.

    - Nick
    - Too many "beachballs", read this: Beachballs
    - Computer seems slower than it used to? Read this for some slow computer tips: Speedup
    - Almost full hard drive? Some solutions. Out of Space
    - Apple Battery Info. Battery

  7. #7

    RavingMac's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 07, 2008
    Location
    In Denial
    Posts
    7,925
    Specs:
    4GB Mac Mini 2012, 13" MBA, 15" MacBook Pro OSX 10.7, 32 GB iPhone 3GS, iPad2 64gb 3G
    Quote Originally Posted by Hutchism View Post
    Does anyone else on here feel the same way?
    Put me in the "No" column.

    I'm very satisfied with the performance and support for my ageing Macs and am thankful we have an alternative to Windows.

    Legacy hardware support is probably one of the major reasons (not the only obviously) why Windows isn't as clean and solid as OS X.

    And, every year we almost drool over ourselves collectively waiting to see what Apple has for us THIS year. Don't see that kind of anticipation with other suppliers.

    Bottomline: You can't divorce the results we like from Apple from the Business Model and Development Strategy that produced them.

    Life is full of trade-offs . . . in the balance I vastly prefer my Macs and the continuous progression in hardware and software.
    I've always wanted to be smart, handsome and modest. But, I guess I'll have to be satisfied with two out of three . . .

  8. #8

    mrplow's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 01, 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    6,907
    Specs:
    27" iMac i7 (2011) 10.11, Mac Mini i5 (2014), iPhone6s, Apple Watch, iPad Pro 9.7, AppleTV (4)
    There's a big overlooked difference in the Windows vs OSX the ethos behind the upgrade:

    Windows OS is far more expensive to buy as it's the software Microsoft makes the money on. They have a bigger drive towards sales of the OS and getting the latest version onto as many systems as possible. They do this by offering a wide range of customisations to cut down on the power required to run and therefore widening the market. This often, using the GPU requirements as an example, results in an OS that cuts it's featureset - the Aero interface etc to allow it to run on more modest hardware. When arguably the best solution would not to upgrade the OS.

    OSX comes from a different perspective - it's cheaper and sells on it's features. Those features, if not supported by your current Mac are there to entice a new hardware purchase - Which is the money making stream for Apple as opposed to the software revenue stream for Microsoft. There's also a approach by Apple to give the user a consistent and positive user experience. You can't do that be disabling features.

    Not arguing for either side just highlighting that they aren't directly comparable.

    But for me personally, I'll have one MacBook that can't take Mountain Lion* but I'm happy for it to stay on Lion.

    * as a footnote, to my knowledge the system requirements for Mountain Lion are not set in stone yet. The only details I can find are for the developer previews. There's a chance (as has happened in the past) that the finally requirements may be more modest and far reaching.
    Not been around these parts for a while. Trying to change that . .

    Please use the reputation system if you think you've been helped - bottom left of this post

  9. #9

    Deckyon's Avatar
    Member Since
    Apr 06, 2011
    Location
    Louisville, KY - USA
    Posts
    1,291
    Specs:
    MBP 17" 2011, 2.3GHz Intel Quad-Core i7, 8GB RAM, MacMini 2011, 2.7GHz Intel Dual-Core i7, 8GB RAM
    Quote Originally Posted by Hutchism View Post
    With that in mind any computer brought in the last 10 years will run Windows 7 (perhaps with a RAM upgrade).
    You have blown all credibility. Any? That's funny, can you install Windows 7 on a 2002 Mac? Try it.

    I have 2 computers at home that will not run anything beyond Windows XP due to how the mainboards are laid out. And yes, I have tried.

    Any? Watch your absolutes and broad statements.

    Hardware becomes obsolete, it is the nature of the beast, if it did not, then why come out with new hardware.
    MBP 17" 2011, 2.3GHz Intel Quad-Core i7, 8GB RAM, AMD Radeon HD 6750M 1GB RAM
    MacMini 2011, 2.7GHz Intel Dual-Core i7, 8GB RAM, AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256MB RAM
    iPhone 5S 64GB, iPad Air 2 128 GB LTE, iPod Nano Gen6 8GB, Apple TV 3 & 2

  10. #10

    Dysfunction's Avatar
    Member Since
    Mar 17, 2008
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    6,881
    Specs:
    Way... way too many specs to list.
    Quote Originally Posted by Deckyon View Post
    Hardware becomes obsolete, it is the nature of the beast, if it did not, then why come out with new hardware.
    legacy hardware also becomes problematic to support, from a developmental aspect.
    mike
    This machine kills fascists
    Got # ? phear the command line!

  11. #11


    Member Since
    Apr 20, 2010
    Posts
    472
    Specs:
    21.5 iMac 3.06 ghz 12gb ram 500g HD iPad 2 16G
    Many of these new "innovations" in the past few years are somewhat incremental and don't seem to support the necessity to reinvent the OS rendering older machines obsolete...Computing is still computing...I don't feel like there have been too many justifiable innovations aside from the tablet explosion and the merging of the OSs' which is influencing these changes...

  12. #12

    Deckyon's Avatar
    Member Since
    Apr 06, 2011
    Location
    Louisville, KY - USA
    Posts
    1,291
    Specs:
    MBP 17" 2011, 2.3GHz Intel Quad-Core i7, 8GB RAM, MacMini 2011, 2.7GHz Intel Dual-Core i7, 8GB RAM
    You dont have to upgrade, no one is forcing anyone else to purchase the new OS. You can still use the obsolete hardware with the obsolete OS until one or both die. BUT, dont complain then when a new innovation is requiring current OS and hardware.
    MBP 17" 2011, 2.3GHz Intel Quad-Core i7, 8GB RAM, AMD Radeon HD 6750M 1GB RAM
    MacMini 2011, 2.7GHz Intel Dual-Core i7, 8GB RAM, AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256MB RAM
    iPhone 5S 64GB, iPad Air 2 128 GB LTE, iPod Nano Gen6 8GB, Apple TV 3 & 2

  13. #13


    Member Since
    Apr 20, 2010
    Posts
    472
    Specs:
    21.5 iMac 3.06 ghz 12gb ram 500g HD iPad 2 16G
    No complaining here...just sayin...call'em like I see'm...My stuff still works fine for me...today. My point is...these "innovations" are pretty **** small with respect to the corresponding hardware upgrades...

  14. #14

    IvanLasston's Avatar
    Member Since
    Feb 26, 2010
    Location
    Rocky Mountain High, Colorado
    Posts
    2,116
    Specs:
    1.8 GHz i7 MBA 11" OSX 10.8.2
    This release cycle already happened with Lion. There are 2006 Mac Minis that use Core Solo - chips that couldn't be upgraded to Lion. ~ 5 year cycle.

    It has been a common recommendation on this forum to buy the most computer you can afford at the time. This is precisely the reason why. The higher spec'd computer will be upgradeable longer. That is the bottom line.

    I agree with Deckyon - Just because you can't run the latest and greatest doesn't mean the computer is obsolete. I have a G4 Mac Mini - still running Leopard that works OK for basic Web surfing. I am also using it as a file server.

    Also - as mentioned don't forget a Windows upgrade is ~$100-$250 proposition for EACH computer (yes there are bundles ~$145 for a 3 pack for home premium) but it isn't the $30 for the upgrade of 5 computers through the App Store.

    If you are mentioning Linux - then just install Linux on the Mac - and have it run the latest and greatest release. I do this all the time with old hardware. I just wipe out Windows or Mac and through a version on Linux on the old computer and it runs great again - usually repurposed as a server of some sort.

  15. #15

    osxx's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 19, 2008
    Location
    houston texas
    Posts
    4,695
    Specs:
    09 MBP 8GB ram 500GB HD OS 10.9 32B iPad 4 32GB iPhone 5 iOs7 2TB TC Apple TV3
    Quote Originally Posted by Hutchism View Post
    Yeah, agree that there isn't always a reason to upgrade, but sometimes there is. I just find that with the amount of money Apple are worth they could afford to support technology that it created a little longer.

    Premium products in general will/should last longer than cheaper alternatives. The issue is not because it's got an integrated graphics card. Its because Apple won't integrate support for this graphics card.

    Linux and Windows manage to support a vast array of hardware . The minimum spec for Windows 7 is this:
    "1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor

    1 gigabyte (GB) RAM (32-bit) or 2 GB RAM (64-bit)

    16 GB available hard disk space (32-bit) or 20 GB (64-bit)

    DirectX 9 graphics device with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver"



    With that in mind any computer brought in the last 10 years will run Windows 7 (perhaps with a RAM upgrade). I don't like windows so much, but Apple really seem to be taking the p***. Come on Apple! Whats with you? Can't even load tunes onto an iPod with 10.4 Tiger any anymore!
    Certain distros of Linux will run faster on older PC's that is true but the older machines loaded with Windows 7 run so poorly with minimum spec its hardly worth it
    hence the reason for Windows 7 Starter.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Upgrading from Lion to Mountain Lion with a bootable Mac OS Installer
    By turtlegurl in forum OS X - Operating System
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-25-2015, 05:41 PM
  2. How to Dual Boot Mountain Lion and Lion on New iMac
    By clint205 in forum Running Windows (or anything else) on your Mac
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-25-2013, 02:17 PM
  3. Upgrading to Mountain Lion, downgrading lion & snow leopard?
    By budcarl in forum OS X - Apps and Games
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-07-2012, 12:38 AM
  4. Time Machine from Lion to Mountain Lion after my iMac goes BANG!
    By Liam in forum OS X - Operating System
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-31-2012, 09:55 AM
  5. Help! Clean installing Mountain Lion over Mountain Lion!
    By datsmabowl in forum OS X - Operating System
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-28-2012, 10:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •